Authorized release certificates
Boeing 737 MAX authorized release documentation records review
This review checks the authorized release certificates behind the installed parts on a Boeing 737 MAX, confirming each part went on with a release the file can produce. It runs during valuation, transfer, or an incoming inspection, run by or for the party relying on the component history. It covers FAA Form 8130-3 and EASA Form 1 certificates, dual-release status where a part crossed authorities, and the installation record that ties a release to a fitted part. You receive an exception list per component, a source map from the installation record to its release, and a closure plan for the parts whose release the file cannot produce.
When this review is needed
- A 737 MAX is in diligence and a buyer will ask for the release behind each installed rotable.
- A part crossed between FAA and EASA control and its dual-release status has to be confirmed.
- An installation record names a part whose release certificate is not in the component file.
- The tail is being accepted onto a program that requires release evidence for installed components.
The problem
An installed part is only as good as the release that put it there, and on a 737 MAX the release certificate and the installation record often live apart. A component file lists a part as fitted while the FAA Form 8130-3 or EASA Form 1 behind it is missing, illegible, or issued to a different serial number than the one installed. Dual release is its own snare, because a certificate valid on one side of the FAA and EASA boundary does not automatically carry the other side's release a receiving operator needs.
What gets reviewed
- FAA Form 8130-3 and EASA Form 1 certificates behind installed components
- Dual-release status for parts that crossed between authorities
- Installation records tying each release to the part actually fitted
- Serial and part-number agreement between release and installation
- Release block completeness, including approval reference and date
- Components whose release the file cannot currently produce
Scope this review
Tell us the asset, the event, and the evidence in scope, and we will outline a focused first engagement.
Send a representative, redacted record set and we will scope the review.
What gets validated
- Each installed component has a release certificate the file can actually produce
- The serial and part number on the release match the part the installation record shows fitted
- Dual-release status is present where the part crossed the FAA and EASA boundary
- The release block is complete, with the approval reference and signature date recorded
- The release date is consistent with the installation event it supports
Evidence normally required
Common discrepancies
- An installed part listed in the file with no release certificate behind it
- A release issued to a serial number different from the part actually fitted
- A part that crossed authorities carrying only a single-side release
- A release block missing its approval reference or signature date
What is at stake
A fitted part with no producible release is a finding a buyer or receiving operator will raise, and closing it means recovering a certificate from a shop that may have moved on. A serial mismatch between the release and the installed part can force removal, and a missing dual release can block acceptance on the authority the aircraft is moving toward.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
List the installed parts
Pull the configuration of installed rotables with their serial and part numbers.
Match release to installation
Tie each installation record to a producible release and check the serial agreement.
Report the exceptions
Deliver the per-component exception list, source map, and closure plan.
What the buyer receives
- An exception list per component graded by missing, mismatched, or incomplete release
- A source map from each installation record to its release certificate
- A closure plan for the components whose release the file cannot produce
Who uses the output
- Asset managers testing whether installed-part releases survive diligence
- Records teams recovering the release certificates behind unsupported installations
- Receiving operators confirming release evidence before accepting the components
How the work fits into the transaction or program
Release documents are the proof that every installed part entered service legitimately, so they sit under the configuration and component histories a transaction reads. This review confirms each installation reaches a producible release, and its exception list drives the certificate recovery an acceptance or transfer waits on.
Aircraft-specific considerations
The 737 MAX places weight on part-number status and modification embodiment, so release evidence has to match the exact standard fitted rather than the part family alone. Software and avionics units, where the installed part number carries a configuration meaning, are where a release most often names a superseded standard, so those components are checked against the current baseline rather than the historical one.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
A 737 MAX moving toward an EASA basis needs EASA Form 1 or dual-release evidence for its installed parts, and an FAA Form 8130-3 alone does not carry the receiving authority's release, so the review flags where dual release is required and absent.
Regulatory limits
This review verifies that release evidence exists and matches the installed parts. It does not issue a release certificate, approve an installation, or make any airworthiness determination on a component or the aircraft.
What this review does not cover
- Issuing or reissuing any authorized release certificate
- Physical removal, installation, or inspection of any component
- Any airworthiness determination on the installed parts
Specific to this review
- A release valid on one side of the FAA and EASA boundary does not carry the other side's release, so dual-release status is a separate check, not an assumption.
- A serial mismatch between the release and the fitted part is the finding most likely to force a removal rather than a paperwork fix.
- On the 737 MAX, an avionics or software unit's release must match the exact embodied part-number standard, because the number carries configuration meaning.
Sources
Federal Aviation Administration. Completion and use of FAA Form 8130-3, Authorized Release Certificate, for new and used parts.
European Union Aviation Safety Agency. EASA authorised release certificate for components, equivalent in function to FAA Form 8130-3.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Maintenance recordkeeping content and approval-for-return-to-service requirements, including 43.9, 43.11, and Appendix B.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Records an owner or operator must keep, including total time in service, current status of life-limited parts, and AD compliance.
Frequently asked questions
Is an FAA Form 8130-3 enough if the aircraft is moving to an EASA register?
Not on its own. An 8130-3 carries the FAA release, but a receiving EASA operator needs an EASA Form 1 or a dual release for the installed part. This review flags each part where only a single-side release is on file so the dual-release evidence can be recovered before acceptance.
Relevant glossary terms
Related pages
Where this fits
Talk to an engineer who has done this work
We will walk through your current state, the records or evidence involved, and a scoped first engagement.
Talk through the aircraft, records, evidence, deadline, and next useful step.